From the article: "Cutting the spending sharply, as proposed by Ryan for example, would mean a brutal squeeze on America's poor (who are already suffering from high unemployment..."

We all want to help the poor and the question is do we help them by unsustainable increases of taxing and spending, or do we let people keep money to hire the poor. It's a choice between a few months of welfare and years of job opportunities.

From the article: "Cutting the spending sharply, as proposed by Ryan for example, would mean a brutal squeeze on America's poor (who are already suffering from high unemployment..."

We all want to help the poor and the question is do we help them by unsustainable increases of taxing and spending, or do we let people keep money to hire the poor. It's a choice between a few months of welfare and years of job opportunities.

Click to expand...

Nobody is hiring fucking hiring the poor, get that through your head, the companies have made good money the last few years and have offshored it, fuck that, if they're not going to hire they shouldn't get jack shit, fuck that trickle bullshit, it has never worked.

From the article: "Cutting the spending sharply, as proposed by Ryan for example, would mean a brutal squeeze on America's poor (who are already suffering from high unemployment..."

We all want to help the poor and the question is do we help them by unsustainable increases of taxing and spending, or do we let people keep money to hire the poor. It's a choice between a few months of welfare and years of job opportunities.

Click to expand...

No. You solve everyone's problem by taxing the rich at the rates that were present during Clinton's administration. That takes care of the poor, relieves the burden on the middle class, and provides the money the feds need to balance the budget, and begin paying off the debt. If you don't restore the tax rates for the wealthy, you're dooming this country financially. There is NO WAY to pay off the debt with the tax rates in the Ryan plan.

Let's see Ryan's plan - cutting sharply?
For his Medicare - changing over to vouchers for Medicare in 2022 is sharp? That is 12 years in my book.
Retired husband and wife would be getting 16,000.00 to chose health care plan.
Keeping it the way it is for people who are 55 and up, it gives plenty of time for people who are 54 and under to plan for the change.
Keeping it for low income families (poor) and for those that have autism or greater disabilities. This is helping the poor.
His plan saves money. Right now we are paying 808 billion for this program. His plan would save us around 240 billion dollars. Maybe even more because in the future we will not have the large baby boomer generation. We will have a much smaller amount of retirees,the ones who are 54 now, in 2022 is not going to be a large amount.
Everybody should start going to Thomas.gov and start reading these bills and stop listening to News Media and blogs.

...or do we let people keep money to hire the poor. It's a choice between a few months of welfare and years of job opportunities.

Click to expand...

The point of the recent stimulus was substituting public spending for the private spending which isn't happening.

Click to expand...

Unfunded liabilities is unsustainable.We have to change entitlement programs.
Medicare costs is going to reach 78 trillion - unsustainable
Unfunded liabilities is going to reach 113 trillion, unsustainable.
High taxes will not fix this. Cutting must be done in order to help the poor.
We have government programs who help the rich,this kind of stuff has to stop.

We all want to help the poor and the question is do we help them by unsustainable increases of taxing and spending...

Click to expand...

They're not unsustainable.

Click to expand...

We probably agree that governments are like other human activities and are subject to limits of growth, and that a nation's tax/spending is limited by the size of the economy that supports it. As our economy shrinks so do the limits to tax/spending.

We also have to get rid of the regulations and laws that are costing us all to much money.
Companies are paying out so much money to meet the regulations that they don't have the money to hire people or the money to give raises to the workers they already have.
Example the EPA requires so much testing of water companies even when it has been proven that there are many water sources that don't have the same problems. The East coast has some problems and they need those tests but in the west those problems do not exist. It brings up the cost of water for every single test that they deem needs to be done. It has gotten to the point that too many regulations are strangling us to be productive.
This micro management of government has to stop.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!